Aspirin can prevent the depletion of PUFA

[MrGilbert]

You can try to convince me by explaining the pros and cons.

Pros: turbo pufa depletion
Cons: ???

I've no idea. Hopefully somebody more knowledgeable chimes in

 

[yerrag]

Pros: turbo pufa depletion
Cons: ???

I've no idea. Hopefully somebody more knowledgeable chimes in

I think it's a disproportionate response equivalent to exercising the nuclear option.

 

[LA]

Good points.

There are two camps then, as I see it, w/r to dealing with PUFA stores in the body on the way to getting rid of them as much as possible.

Both agree on going cold turkey on PUFA in order to keep from accumulating more, or trying as much since we can't avoid it totally. With the goal of eventually having low enough PUFA FFAs in the blood that does not interfere significantly with sugar metabolism and low oxidative stress from the prevention of lipid peroxidation.

Option X involves taking aspirin and niacinamide for the purpose of inhibiting lipolysis and fatty acid oxidation.

Option Y involves none of that.

Option X gives instant results as far as improving sugar metabolism while Option Y requires waiting 4 years.

Option Y allows one to get rid of PUFA stores in a big way (significant doesn't have that impact) after 4 years of slowly using it up daily while with Option X more PUFA stores remain.

During the 4 years, Option X minimizes lipid peroxidaton while Option Y doesn't. Though after 4 years, the situation changes as with Option Y, there is a lot of PUFA stores reduction, and Option Y begins to have less PUFA fatty acids in the blood from having less PUFA stores, as. compared to Option X.

During the 4 years, Option X can already eat plenty of white sugar and drink regular Coke (assuming the only reason he has blood sugar problems is because of PUFA blocking sugar absorption and metabolism) while Option Y has to manage his poor sugar metabolism by eating complex carbohydrates that include fiber to keep his blood sugar from swinging high and low, keeping his blood sugar stable.

After 4 years though, Option X still has to go with aspirin and niacinamide to manage his high PUFA stores, while Option Y is not needing such crutches anymore.

Instant gratification vs. working to earn a 4 yr. diploma in good sugar metabolism is a choice.

Note; Vitamin E intake during the 4 years is highly suggested for Option Y.

Thank you for your good insights. I get most/all of my pufa from the extra dark chocolate I eat daily. I know it is bad to eat the kind that has soy lecithin although I probably wont be changing so hopefully the Vit-E 400-IU d-alpha tocopheral I take once or twice daily along with 2 aspirin once daily has helped. Fat free is impossible as I am already too slim to do no fat. Whole milk seems to be what keeps my hair healthy unless I eat plenty of beef daily and I dont have time. You are very helpful.

 

[CLASH]

Good points.

There are two camps then, as I see it, w/r to dealing with PUFA stores in the body on the way to getting rid of them as much as possible.

Both agree on going cold turkey on PUFA in order to keep from accumulating more, or trying as much since we can't avoid it totally. With the goal of eventually having low enough PUFA FFAs in the blood that does not interfere significantly with sugar metabolism and low oxidative stress from the prevention of lipid peroxidation.

Option X involves taking aspirin and niacinamide for the purpose of inhibiting lipolysis and fatty acid oxidation.

Option Y involves none of that.

Option X gives instant results as far as improving sugar metabolism while Option Y requires waiting 4 years.

Option Y allows one to get rid of PUFA stores in a big way (significant doesn't have that impact) after 4 years of slowly using it up daily while with Option X more PUFA stores remain.

During the 4 years, Option X minimizes lipid peroxidaton while Option Y doesn't. Though after 4 years, the situation changes as with Option Y, there is a lot of PUFA stores reduction, and Option Y begins to have less PUFA fatty acids in the blood from having less PUFA stores, as. compared to Option X.

During the 4 years, Option X can already eat plenty of white sugar and drink regular Coke (assuming the only reason he has blood sugar problems is because of PUFA blocking sugar absorption and metabolism) while Option Y has to manage his poor sugar metabolism by eating complex carbohydrates that include fiber to keep his blood sugar from swinging high and low, keeping his blood sugar stable.

After 4 years though, Option X still has to go with aspirin and niacinamide to manage his high PUFA stores, while Option Y is not needing such crutches anymore.

Instant gratification vs. working to earn a 4 yr. diploma in good sugar metabolism is a choice.

Note; Vitamin E intake during the 4 years is highly suggested for Option Y.

I dont think its that cut and dry.

Niacinamide and aspirin will never entirely eliminate fatty acid oxidation. So in both options fatty acids will still continue to oxidize.

Even in your model with aspirin and niacinamide blocking fatty acid oxidation entirely (it doesn't), I'm assuming that your assuming PUFA will be depleted from tissues via glucouronidation. I dont know the kinetics of the glucouronic enzymes for glucouronidation of PUFA but I doubt that the system functions faster than actual oxidation.


Either way, as far as I understood it:

1) Aspirins use here is to help block the conversion of PUFA into its inflammatory mediators in states if high tissue PUFA, while helping a bit to lower excess free fatty acids.

2) Vit E's role was to help inhibit lipid peroxidation. Although research seems to point to the fact that Vit E cant protect against all the peroxidative damage of excess PUFA. (I would say Polyphenols, adequate cellular Vit C, adequate cellular glutathione, and optimized cell respiration are required here as well to help protect against excess lipid peroxidation).

3) Niacinamide's role was to help minimize excess fatty acid oxidation, while providing electron carriers for the mitochondria.

Even with all of this said the PUFA stored in tissue, which includes fat stores, and the cellular structure technically should be replaced. Some of the biggest problem areas for PUFA besides its presence in the blood stream, is its direct incorporation into the "cellular membrane", mitochondria, and general cellular structure. In these places the PUFA are supposedly more protected from peroxidation, however they are still many times more peroxidizable than MUFA or SAFA. Once a chain reaction occurs, which is likely if the mitochondria are producing high amounts of ROS from PUFA incorporation into their structure, unless theres adequate antioxidant support the situation can become quite problematic.

So in reality the 4th step would be to replace that PUFA with MUFA and SAFA, with a combination of production from carbs and from dietary intake (dietary intake will most likely be the largest source).


Even with all this said, I doubt options 1-3 would significantly increase the speed of "PUFA Detox". More likely what would happen is that they would offer protection during the so called detox.

Option 4 may help to speed up the detox a bit, as will supporting liver health, and mitochondrial function.

 

[yerrag]

Niacinamide and aspirin will never entirely eliminate fatty acid oxidation. So in both options fatty acids will still continue to oxidize.

Even in your model with aspirin and niacinamide blocking fatty acid oxidation entirely (it doesn't

I said I agreed with you, implied by "good points."

How did you interpret otherwise though?

 

[CLASH]

I said I agreed with you, implied by "good points."

How did you interpret otherwise though?

The "(it doesn't)" is more for other readers, so theres not confusion on my stance. Its not a correction directed at you.

Your arguments implied, atleast to me, the idea of inhibition of fatty acid oxidation, thats why I prefaced with that statement.

My personal opinion was that the model you proposed was too cut and dry, and I explained why I think that. I am not saying you are incorrect, just offering an opinion.

 

[yerrag]

Your arguments implied, atleast to me, the idea of inhibition of fatty acid oxidation, thats why I prefaced with that statement.

But inhibition is not meant to be understood as blocking entirely.

Ray uses that word very often, and the meaning is not meant as blocking entirely, but merely to suppress.

I understand it now, It comes down to the meaning of the word "inhibition."

 

[CLASH]

Option Y allows one to get rid of PUFA stores in a big way (significant doesn't have that impact) after 4 years of slowly using it up daily while with Option X more PUFA stores remain.

I actually misread what you said Yerrag. I thought you said that "option X would get rid of PUFA stores in a big way". That why my assumption was that you were implying with option X you would move PUFA through glucoronidation. With the rate I thought you were ascribing to option X for PUFA depletion, I didnt think the glucoronidation explanation was feasible.


Even with all that said, I still dont think its that cut and dry; but the general idea is on point.

It would be more of a spectrum I'd say and less of a "this option or that option". I think the ideal scenario would be to include all the components I discussed in my post, but in the right amounts for the individual.

 

[TheBeard]

What about Option Z: fat free diet?

PUFA Depletion Can (probably) Be Accomplished In 30 Days!

Since removing PUFA from the body is one of the primary goals of Peatarians, naturally anything that can speed up the process of waiting at least 4 years would be highly desirable. I have been experimenting myself relentlessly with speeding that process up (as safely as possible). While...

raypeatforum.com

Saturated fats are absolutely essential to health, for hormone production among other things.

 

[MrGilbert]

Saturated fats are absolutely essential to health, for hormone production among other things.

Of course, but the idea is to do it for just a short period, like a fast.

 

[yerrag]

actually misread what you said Yerrag. I thought you said that "option X would get rid of PUFA stores in a big way". That why my assumption was that you were implying with option X you would move PUFA through glucoronidation. With the rate I thought you were ascribing to option X for PUFA depletion, I didnt think the glucoronidation explanation was feasible.

I see how that can happen. I'm just glad that I didn't have to choose between Option X and Option Y. Otherwise I would have chosen Option X. I just did Option Y one day, and practically let time fly by. I wasn't keeping time, but 4 years or more passed, and I tested myself by taking a teaspoon honey in between meals, and felt energized instead of blood sugar low shortly. Did the same with white sugar, and same effect. Then skipped lunch and didn't feel sugar low sick when I used to. Then fasted a whole day with stable blood sugar within optimal range, when I couldn't do it before. That's when I realized what I described as Option Y works.

Even with all that said, I still dont think its that cut and dry; but the general idea is on point.

It would be more of a spectrum I'd say and less of a "this option or that option".

I'm not sure it needed to be more complicated than having two choices. I can't see much of a gray area unless you count different doses of aspirin and niacinamide as being additional choices.

I think the ideal scenario would be to include all the components I discussed in my post, but in the right amounts for the individual.

That wouldn't hurt as this video of CMJ supports what you say:


View: https://youtu.be/MgR7lGxcoZE


But the danger in telling people to take both vitamin E and vitamin C is many would just take vitamin C, and not vitamin E, which is really the vitamin needed to stop lipid peroxidation. Tell them to take vitamin E and vitamin C and precursors of glutathione, and because there's more to do, they just don't do it lol. But a lot of this dynamic exists with people you coach. In a forum, I opt to make it short sometimes, and if I had to be concise, I'll feel like writing a book each time, replete with *, **, ***, and **** Besides, I do get the feeling that in a thread when many people give answers, it sometimes does not pay (in terms of getting interest) when I get too long-winded. I expend a lot of effort and the OP just ignores it. It's like damn, why did I bother explaining it so thoroughly. Oh well... you know how that goes

 

[Birdie]

Pros: turbo pufa depletion
Cons: ???

I've no idea. Hopefully somebody more knowledgeable chimes in

Ray says it's important to reduce puffa rather slowly. It's been a long time but as I recall it should take 3 or 4 years. And you never get rid of every bit. And our diets will always have some pufa. So, don't be in a hurry. Slow and steady with mistakes but trudging on.

 

[Dr. B]

Ray says it's important to reduce puffa rather slowly. It's been a long time but as I recall it should take 3 or 4 years. And you never get rid of every bit. And our diets will always have some pufa. So, don't be in a hurry. Slow and steady with mistakes but trudging on.

do you think food products, like even milk, had 0 or very little pufa in the past?
like even 100% grass fed milk, is mostly saturated/mufa but still 3% pufa right? which means if youve got 50g of milkfat or butter or cream its gonna be 1.5g pufa?
do you think the pufa proportion was lower, and SFA portion was higher in the past, and this is why humans in the past lived much longer?

 

[Birdie]

do you think food products, like even milk, had 0 or very little pufa in the past?
like even 100% grass fed milk, is mostly saturated/mufa but still 3% pufa right? which means if youve got 50g of milkfat or butter or cream its gonna be 1.5g pufa?
do you think the pufa proportion was lower, and SFA portion was higher in the past, and this is why humans in the past lived much longer?

That's an interesting thought isn't it. I don't have the foggiest. On the pufa, in today's milk choices, I remember he said the nutrients in milk make it an acceptable tradeoff. It does make sense that milk in the past had much less or 0 pufa.

 

[Dr. B]

That's an interesting thought isn't it. I don't have the foggiest. On the pufa, in today's milk choices, I remember he said the nutrients in milk make it an acceptable tradeoff. It does make sense that milk in the past had much less or 0 pufa.

the modern milk and beef fats, thanks to the cows ability to saturate PUFA they eat, even on heavily soy fed corn fed cows their fat is only like 6% PUFA, and like 50/44 split of sfa/mufa. if its 100% grass fed cows, pufa seems to lower to maybe 3% of the overall milk fat, which would give you around 1.5g pufa per 50g of fat from milk which is low enough

 

[Birdie]

the modern milk and beef fats, thanks to the cows ability to saturate PUFA they eat, even on heavily soy fed corn fed cows their fat is only like 6% PUFA, and like 50/44 split of sfa/mufa. if its 100% grass fed cows, pufa seems to lower to maybe 3% of the overall milk fat, which would give you around 1.5g pufa per 50g of fat from milk which is low enough

Helpful. Thank you for this info.